ac+erm final reportnrl.northumbria.ac.uk/34187/1/ac+ermfinalreport.pdf · ac+erm project executive...

Final Project Report

The AC+erm Project – Accelerating positive change in electronic records management'carried out by the School of Computing, Engineering and Information Sciences in Northumbria University from2007 to 2010. It aimed to investigate and critically explore issues and practical strategies to supportaccelerating the pace of positive change in managing electronic records.

The project focused on designing an organisation-centred architecture from three perspectives: (i) people,including vision, awareness, culture, drivers and barriers; (ii) working practices including processes,procedures, policies and standards; and (iii) technology in terms of the design principles for delivering effectiverecordkeeping.

Funded by the Arts & Humanities Research Council (AHRC)Grant Number: AH/D001935/1

This work by authors: Julie McLeod, Sue Childs and Rachel Hardiman

Project Team:Prof Julie McLeod, Project Director

© Northumbria University 2007

Copyright to all project publications and outputs is retained by the School of Computing, Engineering andInformation Sciences of Northumbria University.

Use of these materials is permitted under the terms of the Creative Commons AttributionShareAlike 2.0 UK: England & Wales Licence.To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/byCreative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.Accelerating Positive Change in Electronic Records Understanding issues and developing practical approaches

Prof Julie McLeod, Project DirectorSue Childs, Research FellowRachel Hardiman, Senior Research Assistant

Accelerating positive change in electronic records management' – is a research projectcarried out by the School of Computing, Engineering and Information Sciences in Northumbria University from2007 to 2010. It aimed to investigate and critically explore issues and practical strategies to supportaccelerating the pace of positive change in managing electronic records.

centred architecture from three perspectives: (i) people,including vision, awareness, culture, drivers and barriers; (ii) working practices including processes,procedures, policies and standards; and (iii) technology in terms of the design principles for delivering effective

Funded by the Arts & Humanities Research Council (AHRC)

This work by authors: Julie McLeod, Sue Childs and Rachel Hardiman

© Northumbria University 2007–2010

Copyright to all project publications and outputs is retained by the School of Computing, Engineering and

Use of these materials is permitted under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/uk/ or send a letter toCreative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.Accelerating Positive Change in Electronic Records Understanding issues and developing practical approaches

AC+erm project http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/acerm


© CEIS, Northumbria University2010

i

Contents

Executive summary i

1. Introduction 1

1.1. Research context 1

1.2. Research questions 1

1.3. Aims and objectives 1

2. Methodology 3

2.1 Overall Project Approach 3

2.2 Systematic Literature Review Phase 3

2.3 Investigation Phase 4

2.3.1 Delphi Studies 4

2.3.2 Colloquia 5

2.4 Dissemination Phase 6

3. Findings 7

3.1 Systematic Literature Review 7

3.1.1 Review of People Aspects 7

3.1.2 Review of Process Aspects 8

3.1.3 Review of Systems and Technology Aspects 8

3.1.4 Review of Case Studies / Case Examples 9

3.1.5 Review of Critical Success Factors 9

3.1.6 ERM resources list 9

3.2 Delphi Studies 10

3.2.1 People Facet 10

3.2.2 Process Facet 11

3.2.3 Systems and Technology Facet 12

3.3 Vignettes 14

3.4 Building a vision of ERM 14

3.5 Project outputs 15

3.6 Project evaluation 16

4. Conclusions 17

5. References 20

Appendix 1: List of outputs and statistics demonstrating use 21

Appendix 2: Articles 24




i

AC+erm ProjectExecutive Summary

The management of electronic records has been a significant issue for organisations formore than two decades and, although various bodies have developed guidelines, standardsand systems, the pace of change had been relatively slow (McDonald, 2005). The question iswhy?

This project investigated and critically explored issues and practical strategies to supportaccelerating the pace of positive change in managing electronic records - hence its nameAC+erm (Accelerating +positive Change in ERM). The objectives were to:

• investigate the issues and problems of ERM• challenge existing recordkeeping paradigms to position the development an appropriate

practical paradigm for ERM• develop and share examples of ERM strategies, tactics and practice; and• develop a contemporary critical view of the state of ERM globally at both the research

and practical levels.

It focused on three perspectives of designing an organisational-centred architecture formanaging electronic records: (i) people, including vision, awareness, culture, drivers andbarriers; (ii) working practices including processes, procedures, policies and standards; and(iii) technology in terms of the design principles for delivering effective recordkeeping.

ERM is extremely challenging; many questions need to be asked. To be realistic this projectfocused on the following ones:

• What progress has really been made in ERM in the wired and wireless officeenvironment? What strategies, tactics and practical solutions are working? Why andhow?

• What vision do organisations have for their office environment? What is their vision ofrecordkeeping in the context of their mission? What are the drivers and influencers –risk management, compliance, corporate governance, other issues?

• How well do organisations understand their ‘business’ processes? Do they understandhow people work, how they create and use information, how they collaborate, howdecisions are made? What are the implications for recordkeeping systems?

• What standards and models underpin approaches to ERM? What principles and practicefrom the paper world have been adopted or adapted?

• How can the necessary recordkeeping infrastructure of policies, standards and practice,systems and technologies, and people be assembled into an architecture that isorganisation-centred? What principles of design underpin the technology that candeliver effective records management?

The project was conducted in phases over three years using a mixed methodologycomprising:

• a comprehensive systematic review of the relevant literature validated by primarydata from practitioners and academics (Jan 2007-Dec 2009)

• an investigation of three facets of designing an organisation-centred architecture forERM, using a series of Delphi studies and a series of face-to-face colloquia (Jan2008-Oct 2009)




ii

• a major dissemination activity running throughout the project, using a variety ofmethods, based around a website and blog with use of tweets and emails to advertiseweb and blog updates (Jan 2007-Mar 2010).

The findings are therefore transferable and the outputs usable in different contexts bydifferent organisations. Since recordkeeping in the e-environment involves differentstakeholder groups (i.e. executives/senior managers, records professionals, IT/systemsadministrators and recordkeepers) and is trans-disciplinary, the project engaged people frommultiple disciplines and all stakeholder groups. Participants included both academics andpractitioners.

The data provide the largest global set of real evidence of its kind about ERM that supports,and in some cases refutes, what has been suspected for some time but has remained largelyanecdotal. The findings provide some new insight into the issues, particularly in terms of theinterrelationships between the three perspectives of designing an organisational-centredarchitecture for managing electronic records that were studied (people, process andtechnology); the emphasis on contextualisation, complexity and contingency; and thepredominance of people issues. The methodological approach is innovative in the researchmethods used and their novel combination and application in the records managementdiscipline.

The key headline findings that emerged about electronic records management are:

few organisations and/or individuals have articulated a vision for ERM the people, process and systems/technology aspects of ERM are inextricably linked;

though useful for the research design and as an analytical tool, the distinctionbetween them is not one that can legitimately be drawn in modelling what actuallyhappens

people issues are predominant, fundamental and challenging as they concern culture,philosophical attitudes, awareness of RM and ERM issues, preferences, knowledgeand skills

records professionals may be part of the problem as well as part of the solution, e.g.they take the holistic view and have the principles and tools to manage records buttheir demands may be unrealistic or too constraining

solutions for ERM are contextualised and complex the success and/or failure of ERM implementations can be contingent on the

presence/absence of small or accidental factors, e.g. an individual; an event,coincidence or opportunity)

there are few published in-depth critical case studies of success or failure, or post-implementation evaluation

risk based approaches are needed if the challenges are to be addressed in a timelyfashion and with the resources available in many contexts/organisations

records management principles appear to be applicable for ERM, however practiceneeds to be adapted.

The project outputs include solutions that have worked, or not worked, related to the keyissues facing the people, process and technology aspects of ERM. They derive from theexperiences and expertise and perspectives of the Delphi participants. These will enableindividuals or organisations to select solutions to try and the vignettes provide ready-to-usetools and models to develop contextualised tools when facing their own ERM problems orchallenges. Both have been produced in a wide range of formats – text, pictures, video - toengage interest and to be more usable by practitioners and academics.




iii

The innovative research methodology provides valuable knowledge and learning for futureresearch in the records and wider information science disciplines. The headline findingsabout methodology are that:

whilst it is possible and appropriate to use SLR methodology in an informationscience discipline, where the discipline has a wide variety of literature and limitedpeer reviewed and/or research based literature the task of reviewing it systematicallyis significant

engaging all stakeholder groups in ERM and academics from multiple disciplines ischallenging but vital and rewarding; it can be particularly difficult to engage seniormanagers and IT professionals. The use of a multi-disciplinary expert panel isextremely beneficial for peer review and overseas experts are valuable in bringing anon-UK perspective and raising the research profile internationally

the combination of e-Delphi studies and related colloquia can be used successfully toengage a wide variety of stakeholders, from a wide geographic base, and gainfeedback to validate, extend and evaluate findings throughout a research project andimprove the outputs

the combined use thematic and phenomenological analysis methods enables detaileddata analysis and researcher interpretation of emergent issues

adopting an ongoing dissemination using a website and blog is highly recommendedfor longer (2-3years) projects in fast moving subjects to share findings in a timelymanner, maintain interest and engagement; however additional time needs to be builtinto project plans for final synthesis

blogs cannot be relied upon for data collection.

This research project was timely and, based on the statistics collected and comments andemails received, it has been valuable and has had impact. It has provided an in-depththeoretical and practical assessment of ERM. It provides a range of different outputs for usein dealing with real world ERM problems facing organisations and individuals.

Further dissemination activities from this project, in the form of published articles, willcontribute more synthesis of the results and learning.




1

1. Introduction

1.1. Research context

The management of electronic records has been a significant issue for organisations formore than two decades. And, for the last decade, records professionals have had access toguidelines, standards and systems developed by national archives, coalitions, professionalassociations and research groups. By the end of 2005, when this project was conceived, thee-government vision of countries such as the UK and Malaysia was not a reality. In the sameyear McDonald (2005) pointed out that the pace of change had been relatively slow. Thequestion was why?

To realise change in electronic records management (ERM) we need to address twofundamental issues. First, we need to recognise that the world of work has changed radicallyand we need a better understanding of the way organisations, in all sectors, do 'business'.Successful electronic records management requires understanding working practices,business processes and organisational drivers. We need standards and practices not only forrecordkeeping but also for the way we work today. Second, much recordkeeping theory andpractice originates from the paper world and is being imposed onto the electronic world. Weneed to challenge the relevance of paper practices for the electronic world.

1.2. Research questions

ERM is extremely challenging; many questions need to be asked. To be realistic this projectfocused on the following ones:

• What progress has really been made in ERM in the wired and wireless officeenvironment? What strategies, tactics and practical solutions are working? Why andhow?

• What vision do organisations have for their office environment? What is their vision ofrecordkeeping in the context of their mission? What are the drivers and influencers –risk management, compliance, corporate governance, other issues?

• How well do organisations understand their ‘business’ processes? Do they understandhow people work, how they create and use information, how they collaborate, howdecisions are made? What are the implications for recordkeeping systems?

• What standards and models underpin approaches to ERM? What principles and practicefrom the paper world have been adopted or adapted?

• How can the necessary recordkeeping infrastructure of policies, standards and practice,systems and technologies, and people be assembled into an architecture that isorganisation-centred? What principles of design underpin the technology that candeliver effective records management?

1.3. Aims and Objectives

The aim of the project was to investigate and critically explore issues and practical strategiesto support accelerating the pace of positive change in managing electronic records. Hence itsname, the AC+erm (Accelerating +positive Change in ERM) project. The objectives were to:

• investigate the issues and problems of ERM• challenge existing recordkeeping paradigms to position the development an appropriate

practical paradigm for ERM• develop and share examples of ERM strategies, tactics and practice; and• develop a contemporary critical view of the state of ERM globally at both the research

and practical levels.




2

It focused on three perspectives of designing an organisational-centred architecture formanaging electronic records: (i) people, including vision, awareness, culture, drivers andbarriers; (ii) working practices including processes, procedures, policies and standards; and(iii) technology in terms of the design principles for delivering effective recordkeeping.




3

2. Methodology

2.1. Overall Project Approach

The AC+erm Project was consciously conducted within the terms of explicit researchmethodologies and methods and their underlying philosophies and paradigms. A mixedmethodology was used, comprising mostly qualitative methods (recognising the range ofviews, experience, roles, expertise, challenges and practical solutions) but also somequantitative methods (involving the ranking of issues/solutions). The findings are thereforetransferable and the outputs usable in different contexts by different organisations. To ensurerigour and consistency, this methodological approach was identified and developed beforethe research process was started; the agreed philosophical and methodological positionsdetermined, or informed, the methods and tools appropriate for carrying out the research.(See AC+erm Project: Philosophical, Paradigmatic and Methodological Underpinnings forfurther detailshttp://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/academic/ceis/re/isrc/themes/rmarea/erm/project/).

The project was conducted in phases over three years:

• a comprehensive systematic review of the relevant literature validated by primarydata from practitioners and academics (Jan 2007-Dec 2009)

• an investigation of three facets of designing an organisation-centred architecture forERM, using a series of Delphi studies and a series of face-to-face colloquia (Jan2008-Oct 2009)

• a major dissemination activity running throughout the project, using a variety ofmethods, based around a website and blog with use of tweets and emails to advertiseweb and blog updates (Jan 2007-Mar 2010).

Since recordkeeping in the e-environment involves different stakeholder groups (i.e.executives/senior managers, records professionals, IT/systems administrators andrecordkeepers) (ISO 15489, 2001) and is trans-disciplinary, involving informationmanagement, humanities, social sciences, public policy, history, business management etc;the project engaged people from multiple disciplines and all stakeholder groups. Participantsincluded both academics and practitioners.

2.2. Systematic Literature Review Phase

The first phase of the project comprised a major literature review of the topic of e-recordsmanagement. The last comprehensive literature review on this topic was published in 1996(Erlandsson, 1996).

The review was conducted using the systematic literature review (SLR) methodology, whichhad not previously been used in the records management field. The SLR is particularly welldeveloped in the medical field, but its use is also increasing in social science disciplines.

Selected outputs from the SLR were used to inform the initial questions for the Delphistudies, as well as to provide practical information to enable action by users of the outputs.

An SLR aims for a more objective, rigorous approach to reviewing the literature. Theobjectivity and rigour comes from establishing elements a priori and following a standardprocess, particularly for assessing the quality of the literature and extracting relevant data(Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, 2001). The stages of a classic systematic reviewcomprise:




4

1. framing the question for the review2. identifying relevant literature3. assessing the quality of the literature4. summarising the evidence5. interpreting the findings6. writing a narrative report, including data tables, a bibliography and details of the

review process.

2.3. Investigation Phase

The investigative phase of the project explored three facets of designing an organisation-centred architecture for ERM. These three facets – people issues, understanding workprocesses, and systems and technologies – were investigated in sequence, the People andProcess phases taking place in 2008 and the Systems and Technology phase in 2009.Informed by the SLR, the investigations combined e-Delphi studies and face-to-facecolloquia involving a mix of experts, disciplines and recordkeeping stakeholders.

2.3.1. Delphi Studies

The Delphi technique was developed in the 1950s at the Rand Corporation (Dalkey andHelmer, 1963), to gather a consensus of ‘expert’ opinion. In this project it was used to gatherprimary data from selected participants and develop a picture of’ expert’ opinion on eachfacet. The electronic form enabled anonymous and geographically wide participation.

The investigation considered what (if any) vision organisations had for their officeenvironment; their vision of recordkeeping in the context of their mission; the drivers andinfluencers for ERM; the barriers to implementing ERM; what progress had really been madein ERM; what strategies, tactics and practical solutions were working or not working. Aspectsof the three facets considered in the course of the studies included:

• People:vision, awareness, culture, drivers, and barriers

• Process:business processes and practices; business systems (not only IT systems); workflow;information flow across the organisation as a whole and within parts of it; theinformation / records management processes as a sub-set of business processes

• Technology:design principles for delivering effective recordkeeping; line-of-business and officesystems used by organisations; mobile technologies supporting mobile working; web-based technologies; multiple forms of information; citizen-based online transactions;personal use of computers and the Internet.

The three Delphi studies followed the same path, though differed somewhat in details, withapproximately 20 participants per study. The questions for discussion were presented mostlyin the form of word-processed questionnaires but at times as web-based surveyquestionnaires. The studies consisted of the following elements:

• one or more rounds to refine and discuss the issues arising from the SLR;• a round where the issues were ranked in order of importance / urgency to address in

order to accelerate positive change in ERM;• one or more rounds to propose and discuss solutions to the issues as refined in the

previous rounds;• a round to evaluate the solutions according to certain set criteria.




5

The participants' responses were analysed using a range of different approaches (subjectthemes, numerical ratings, subjective explorations) to provide a broad view of the data. Theprimary method used was thematic analysis. The resulting analyses or summaries yielded avariety of 'standard' qualitative and quantitative outputs which were presented in textual,numerical, graphical, schematic and diagrammatic visual forms to support different cognitivestyles. The analysis also informed the development of a series of vignettes, a type of outputthat crystallised aspects of the research findings in the form of tools or exemplars that couldbe of use to practitioners, users and other stakeholders. (See Section 3.5 Outputs andAppendix 1.)

During each Delphi Study some particularly interesting or challenging issues emerged, forexample where there were divergent opinions and/or experience or where the participantsraised questions/concerns. Some of these issues were examined in greater depth using themethod of phenomenological analysis.

2.3.2. Colloquia

The analysis of the Delphi study data provided the basis for the discussions held in the seriesof free project colloquia, intended to facilitate further data collection and ongoingdissemination of results. These events also proved to be valuable focal points for discussionand interaction between records professionals, academics in the recordkeeping disciplines,and experts and users from a wider base of disciplines and groups.

The first aim of the colloquia was to validate and extend the Delphi studies through face-to-face discussions between a larger audience of participants. The two methods (of e-Delphisand colloquia) provided a sound balance in terms of data collection enabling expert opinion,experience and views on each issue to be gathered; practical solutions to be shared andrefined, and partnerships to be built. The second aim was to keep delegates informed of ourresearch progress and to share ongoing findings.

The first colloquium, focused on the outputs of the e-Delphi study on the people issues ofERM, took place in London on 09 October 2008. Just under 50 delegates attended andcontributed to a series of discussion forums, adding to and extending the e-Delphi data.

The second colloquium, based on the e-Delphi study on the process aspects of ERM, washeld in Birmingham on 26 March 2009. Over 30 delegates contributed to discussion forumsand to a workshop in which they examined and commented on a number of prototypevignettes / tools based on the data gathered at that point.

The third colloquium, dealing with the results of the e-Delphi study on the systems andtechnology issues, was held in Edinburgh on 24 September 2009. Around 30 delegatesexplored the issues and solutions through discussion and use of some of the projectvignettes / tools.

The fourth and final colloquium was a more substantial event, presented as the latest in thewell-received Northumbria Witness Seminar Conference series. It was held on-campus atNorthumbria University in Newcastle upon Tyne on 4 March 2010. A group of 50 delegatesand witnesses from the wider information management discipline discussed and debated thelinks and synergies, actual and desired, between research and practice in the field of recordsand information management. The full proceedings of this colloquium are publishedseparately as the Proceedings of the Third Northumbria Witness Seminar Conference(http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/academic/ceis/re/isrc/conf/wit10/).




6

2.4. Dissemination Phase

In line with its aim to accelerate the pace of positive change in ERM, the project’s findingswere disseminated on a regular basis throughout its life. They were placed on the Projectwebsite, announced on the project blog, listservs and, later, via Twitter. It was hoped thatsuch ongoing dissemination would emphasise the urgency of the ERM issue, influencechange as the research proceeded, and encourage widespread discussion.

At the end of the project these outputs were refined or modified where necessary andcollated into a more coherent form and uniform style for final publication.

See the Outputs and Findings section of the Project website for more details(http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/academic/ceis/re/isrc/themes/rmarea/erm/diss/).




7

3. Findings

3.1. Dissemination Phase

The SLR covered journal and other literature on ERM published from 1996 to February 2009in the records management discipline and other disciplines. 1756 items were reviewed, 536in depth. The bibliographic details were captured in an Endnote database and the reviewscaptured in an Access database. The latter represents a resource for creating literature mapson aspects of ERM. During the project, reviews were published on:

• people Aspects• process Aspects• technology Aspects• case Studies• critical success factors.

These comprise brief summaries of items from the literature, organised under headings withbibliographic details. They are publicly available as documents on the website(http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/academic/ceis/re/isrc/themes/rmarea/erm/diss/diss_slr/).

3.1.1 Review of People Aspects

55 articles were coded as having a main focus of ‘people’ or as containing coverage ofspecific people topics (i.e. vision, people, partnerships, capacity building, changemanagement). They covered the following aspects:

societal Issues e-government ERM infrastructure ERM ERM research records professionals and other professionals

o new roles and associated skills for records professionalso differing views on ERM between records professionals and other professionalso training in records management for other professionalso partnership working

users / staffo wide range of staff and other stakeholders (patients, external contractors) using

complex database systemso managing personal digital materialso attitudes and perceptionso awareness raising and training

designo need for user-friendly ERMSo discussion and understanding among designers and end-users when designing

ERMSo specification of socio-organizational requirements through metadata when

designing ERMS ERM implementation

o cost of ERM and lack of desire to fund thiso change - caused and requiredo critical success factors

ERMS implementation problems cultural change critical success factors




8

3.1.2 Review of Process Aspects

177 articles were coded as having a main focus of ‘process’ or as containing coverage ofspecific process topics, i.e. business processes, data protection, functional requirements,information access, legal and regulatory requirements, model for ERM, model for paperrecords, other model, risk, RM processes, standards. They covered the following aspects:

the interaction between ICTs and processes: including ICTs needing to supportbusiness processes, affecting existing processes (including RM processes) andcreating new processes; the need integrate ERM / ERMS into business processesand systems and also the continued need for some manual and human-basedprocesses; the debate about whether business analysis / business processreengineering and development of RM infrastructure need to occur before, during orafter ERM/ERMS implementation.

records management / recordkeeping: including the lack of, breakdown of or poor RMpolicies and processes and the many reasons for this.

electronic records and ERM which fell into two main categories relating to:international / national state of play, strategies, policies; and standards,specifications, guidelines.

developing ERM principles and processes: including theory/models from researchprojects; ideas / issues about functional analysis, appraisal at the concept stage,automation of RM processes and others; debate about the applicability of traditionalRM principles and processes in the e-environment and the gap between researchers,theorists and practitioners

legal, business and social issues: including ensuring confidentiality of records,improving access, legal status and legal admissibility of e-records, e-discovery.

3.1.3 Review of Technology Aspects

203 articles were coded as having a main focus of ‘technology’ or as containing coverage ofspecific technological topics. They covered the following aspects:

electronic records management systems IT systems in the health field other types of IT systems (e.g. ECM, SharePoint, Web services etc various technologies (e.g. visual analytics, voice technologies, digital pen and paper,

smartcard email / e-communications Web 2.0 technologies IT standards, frameworks, architectures, models RM standards, frameworks, architectures, models long term storage of E-records / preservation studies of user behaviour / user acceptance and IT systems usability of IT systems digital divide legal issues / regulatory requirements digital signatures IT system design interoperability integration implementation of IT systems - who / what has to change IT systems not up to the task




9

IT adoption / alignment / investment / value IT vendors / IT marketplace historical development of ERM

3.1.4 Review of Case Studies / Case Examples

106 articles were coded as being a case study or a case example of RM / ICT developments/ implementations. They were organised under the following aspects:

development of RM/ERM implementation of an EDRMS implementation of RM software system (other than EDRMS) development of other systems/software use of IT systems

3.1.5 Review of Critical Success Factors

73 articles were coded as containing coverage of critical success factors (CSFs). CSFsidentified were:

approaching implementation projects not just as IT projects gaining commitment and support of Chief Executive Officers aligning projects with business objectives ensuring a project has a clear agenda demonstrating benefits planning procurement and making it requirement-driven integrating systems and technology involving all levels within the organisation and external stakeholders communication change management planning and project management prior existence/development of necessary ‘infrastructures’ piloting and testing sharing expertise involving end-users training and support for users policies and guidelines.

3.1.6 ERM resources list

A large collection of ERM resources - Web sites and documents - were obtained during theprocess of conducting the SLR, as well as from suggestions made by participants in or‘followers’ of the project. These resources cover the following categories:

universities, colleges, and educational institutes archives, record offices, and libraries books and publishers journals government agencies (except for archives, records offices, libraries) major non-government bodies with normative or policy-making powers organisations and consortia (profit and non-profit) professional recordkeepers’ associations / organizations




10

consultancies individuals—Websites and blogs reports, journal articles and conference papers

They are publicly available as a document on the website, as the Electronic Records SearchEngine (a custom Google search engine) and as Sqworl Groups.

3.2. Delphi Studies and Colloquia

The e-Delphi studies and related colloquia successfully engaged participants from allstakeholder groups and academics from multiple disciplines, although engagement of IT staffand senior managers was the most challenging. In total there were 55 active Delphiparticipants and 156 colloquium attendees. The Delphi data is unique, rich and nuancedcomprising ~5300 specific themes. It captures global views and experience on ERM that ismostly not in the public domain.

3.2.1 People Facet

This was the first facet of the investigative phase and related to the human and peopleaspects of managing e-records. It included vision; awareness; culture; drivers and barriers;and the implication of such factors for the implementation of recordkeeping systems.

From a starting point of the 36 people issues that had emerged from the SLR, theparticipants identified a very long list of issues. The analysis revealed eight groups of issues:

• four about the actors/stakeholders (i.e. executives and management, recordsprofessionals, other professionals and staff/users)

• three about systems (RM/IM systems; e-environment and ERM systems)• one about the environment and processes (implementation of ERM and systems

requires change and change management).

When asked to rank these according to urgency to address in relation to accelerating changein ERM, the top three were:

1. CEOs, executives and management lack understanding of RM and their role withinthat

2. records professionals need appropriate knowledge/skills, approaches andrelationships for the e-environment

3. RM and IM principles and practices need to be a valued and an integral part of theorganisation.

Many solutions to the eight groups of issues were suggested – both those that work andthose to avoid – together with reasons why and how they did or did not, would or would notwork, with examples from their own experience and/or perspective. Solutions for the highestranked urgent issue (above) included:

Solutions to TRY because they had lead to success in ERM: make senior managers responsible for missing records link solutions to dealing with real problems promote/educate about RM/ERMS using individual benefits as examples demonstrate problems of poor RM using real case examples demonstrate value/benefits of RM/ERMS using real case examples




11

promote/educate about RM/ERMS using individual business processes andrequirements as examples

present holistic approach to IM rather than focus narrowly on RM design ERM system that is easier to use establish RM under legal corporate function establish single, board-level management role with IM as single corporate function ERM systems requires organisation and planning from start build 'virtual team' of key influencers and specialists engage personally with executives and senior managers involve in ERM systems development from the outset make executive sponsorship a key personal mission

Solutions to AVOID because they impede progress: compliance as a driver – senior managers may accept risk of poor recordkeeping use inaccurate 'scare stories' or poorly-understood legislation to support case focus more on professional records concerns than on stakeholders' aims and

expectations ERM systems for senior managers that cover activities previously undertaking by

secretaries bombard senior managers with information and ideas use generic, corporate RM selling points situating RM under the IT corporate function working from the bottom up ERM implementation as a personal project of senior manager(s) go it alone as an organization's records manager proceed with solution without executive backing submit wordy reports

A number of themes emerged during this facet some of which were selected for furtheranalysis, using the method of Phenomenological Analysis. These were:

• actors and contexts• the records management ‘bottom line’• change management• cultural change• essential skills for records management• management class change• professional ‘turf wars’

These together with the other outputs from the Delphi Study, including the responses toonline survey and Colloquium 1, are available in several documents on the website (Seehttp://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/academic/ceis/re/isrc/themes/rmarea/erm/diss/delphi_diss/people_dis and http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/ceispdf/coll_1_3.pdf)

3.2.2 Process Facet

The second facet of the investigative phase, relating to the process aspects of managing e-records, included business processes and practices; business systems (not only IT systems);workflow; information flow across the organisation as a whole and within parts of it; theinformation / records management processes as a sub-set of business processes.

20 process related issues arose from the literature review and first two Delphi rounds; threefurther emergent issues were identified by the project team; some of the categories could be




12

amalgamated into more general headings. Conveniently, the issues ranked first and secondfell naturally into such an amalgamated category. They were:

1. organisation-level records management policiesMost experts thought organisational-level policies were important and useful, with theproviso that they need to be fit-for-purpose and specific to the organisational context,not just formalities or ‘tick-the-box’ exercises. Benefits of ‘fit-for-purpose’ policiesinclude consistency and data sharing. However, policies are only useful if they areimplemented, and this is dependent on organisational culture. The need to align withnational strategies is very context-specific, dependent on the sector involved.

2. the priority of developing the RM infrastructure over ERM/ ERM systemsimplementationThe responses to this were mixed. Achievement of this may not be possible becauseof resource constraints and lack of skills, etc. However, this may be redundant ifrecords management is embedded into the IT platform and occurs automatically

The solutions proposed to these issues / problems were not analysed in exactly the sameway as for the people solutions but what emerged was that, although this phase wasostensibly about processes, it became clear that many were people related. In fact, so manyof the solutions concerned human rather than purely process aspects that the outputs for thisround were subdivided in this way. The solutions (to try and/or to avoid) suggested for themost important issue to address (number 1 above) related to:

• accountability and responsibilities• education and development of non-RM staff• developing a holistic vision and approach for RM/ERM• less, not more• organisational• planning and methods:• relationships• ‘big stick’• marketing• vision and commitment.

Two topics emerged - records management principles and methods, and what is really‘new’? - which were the subject of phenomenological analyses. Full details of these and theother outputs and findings from this phase are available on the web page for the processfacet and Colloquium 2 (Seehttp://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/academic/ceis/re/isrc/themes/rmarea/erm/diss/delphi_diss/process_diss/ and http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/ceispdf/coll_1_3.pdf).

3.2.3 Systems and Technology Facet

The final facet to be investigated related to the systems and technology aspects of managinge-records. It considered issues in terms of the design principles for delivering effectiverecordkeeping, and included line-of-business and office systems used by organizations;mobile technologies supporting mobile working; web-based technologies; multiple forms ofinformation; citizen-based online transactions; and personal use of computers and theInternet.

Coincidentally, 20 groups of issues also emerged about systems and technology. The oneranked most urgent/important to address was ‘deciding on the appropriate approach to ERMwithin a given context’ and the following solutions to try were suggested:




13

• stand-alone electronic document and records management systems (EDRMS)• EDRMS integrated with office systems• EDRMS integrated with line of business systems• EDRMS integrated with Web 2.0 technologies• use of office systems’ existing functionality• use of line of business systems’ existing functionality• use of enterprise content management (ECM) systems• some combination of these approaches

Two interesting issues that emerged were trade-offs and cloud computing. Trade-offsconcerned priorities, which are not easy to balance or manage. The trade-offs were between:

• prioritising between usability, functionality, integration / interoperability• prioritising initial / ongoing hard costs over everything else• prioritising ease of implementation over everything else.

On cloud computing issues that emerged were around if/when/where and/or how to usecloud computing and what the records management issues/implications were. Views variedand included:

• too early to say what approach should be taken• do not use external cloud computing facilities• use cloud computing for administrative records only• use cloud computing for administrative & core business records only• use cloud computing for all records• apply a proactive approach to tackle the RM issues of cloud computing• apply a reactive approach to tackle the RM issues of cloud computing• do not apply RM to the cloud.

These were explored further in the third colloquium. From the discussion on the appropriateapproach to ERM, it was concluded that some purposeful combination of the variousindividual approaches given (see above) was the way to go. Combination was really the onlyapproach that could work—everything depends so much on sector, money, context, etc.Additionally, different combinations work for different areas of the same organisation andEDRM may work for processing prescription payments, but a different solution in the sameorganisation for policy development or creative work. More is being asked of EDRMS:originally supposed to just speed up process, now being asked to do collaboration andcompliance as well. Several of the individual approaches were not seen as good solutionsbut would still be likely to be introduced or applied because of cost or risk appetite (e.g.stand-alone EDRMS). Solutions that are not necessarily adequate or appropriate get chosenfor various reasons—big difference between those that were actually most appropriate andthose most likely to be implemented (whether through familiarity, management choice,whatever).

From the discussion on trade offs, it was clear that choice of a specific trade off was, in everycase, dependent on type and size of organization, and on business drivers.

A more detailed description of the process and outputs for the Delphi study, along with linksto the outputs themselves, can be found on the web page for this facet (Seehttp://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/academic/ceis/re/isrc/themes/rmarea/erm/diss/delphi_diss/systech_diss/ and http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/ceispdf/coll_1_3.pdf).




14

3.3. Vignettes

The findings from the Delphi studies informed the development of a series of vignettes. 11vignettes were produced of seven types: fridge magnets; phenomenological analyses; richpictures; Snakes and Ladders game; narrative story; videos; mind maps; and word clouds.The full list is as follows:

1. snakes and ladders: opportunities and pitfalls in records management2. phenomenological analysis: actors and contexts3. phenomenological analysis: the bottom line for records management4. phenomenological analysis: principles and methods of records management5. phenomenological analysis: essential skills for records management6. mind map: ERM solutions7. rich picture: managing risk8. narrative / story: privacy, security and access9. word cloud: solutions to ‘people’ issues in managing e-records10. fridge phrases:11. video

Their purpose was not only to provide ready-made tools for use, for example distilling thechallenges and problems and present possible solutions, though many of them can betreated in this manner, but also to suggest models or templates for building tools whosecontent can be tailored to suit a given context. Detailed explanations of the tools, along withsuggestions for use and where to access any resources needed to develop them, areincluded in the vignette document output. For example, the video provides a light-heartedsummary of AC+erm in the form of a ‘news bulletin’ on the project, posted to YouTube(www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYbzU8_C2cY). However, the vignette also explains that it “isnot restricted to any particular audience, but it is not really suitable for formal uses andcontexts - it is not a slick, professional tool and part of its value resides in the disarmingquirkiness of the minimalist animation and characterization, mechanical sound of thesynthesized voices, etc. Suggested uses include: publicizing activities, projects, policies etc;as training aids, to introduce or summarize more detailed material; breaking the ice orintroducing material in training sessions, workshops, etc; collaborative creation of shortvideos during such sessions or as part of a team-building exercise.” The vignettes areaccessible in one document http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/ceispdf/vig.pdf.

3.4. Building a vision of ERM

What did not emerge from the Delphi studies was any vision of ERM in the future so at thetechnology colloquium and following the colloquium, via another e-Delphi study, participantswere invited to try to develop a shared vision.

Participants were given an example of a “ridiculous” fantasy vision to illustrate what we weretrying to achieve whilst not, hopefully, limiting or influencing their thinking. The “ridiculous”vision was illustrated using three draft tools (vignettes):

• in text using fridge phrases• visually as a rich picture• in text as a story illustrating an aspect(s) of the vision and showing how it would work

in reality.

The participants were asked to use the same draft vignettes to develop and articulate theirvision.

The participants came up with the following visions:




15

“ERM will be valued by everyone as an essential enabler. It will be automatic, ubiquitousand intrinsic without being a burden”

“Develop and embed information management in human behaviour using easy solutionsand simple processes which align with IT and social responsibilities”

“Design simplified information structure and e-environment; effective and dynamiccommunication; encourage mutual understanding and ownership; create successfulrevolution”

“We have a dream where traditional RM methods are dead and RM re-invents itself andbecomes embedded in all business processes”

These visions and their further exploration and illustration can be found in the outputs for thethird colloquium which can be found on the web page for Colloquia (Seehttp://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/academic/ceis/re/isrc/themes/rmarea/erm/diss/coll_diss/and http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/ceispdf/coll_1_3.pdf).

3.5. Project Outputs

The main outputs were:

a significant project website (www.northumbria.ac.uk/acerm) a project blog (http://acerm.blogspot.com/) and a twitter presence

(http://twitter.com/Northumbria_RM) the findings details of the methods used (SLR, e-Delphi, colloquia) the vignettes, an ERM resources list, searchable using a customised Google search engine and

browsable via a series of Sqworl groups proceedings of the final colloquium debating practitioner and academic views on the

value and impact of research in the records and information discipline, published in acombination of text, audio, video.

The final outputs from the various stages of the project comprise:

• analyses of the literature reviewed• questions and analyses of responses from the e-Delphi studies• details of colloquia programmes and discussions• vignettes• details of ERM resources, made available as a document as well as a customised

Google search engine• presentations at conferences and other events• details of journal articles.

In total 87 documents of varied forms, containing the findings, vignettes and methods, wereshared as they were developed during the project, for both practitioners and academics touse. At the end of the project these were r edited into a more coherent form and uniform styleand 16 final documents, plus this final project report, were archived on the project’s websiteto remain as a useful source of information.

Email and verbal evidence shows that both practitioners and academics have and are usingthe materials developed and/or are adopting/adapting the ideas and concepts for their own




16

purposes; e.g. some FARMER members are already using AC+erm outputs in their teaching;a PhD student emailed to learn more about the use of the Delphi methodology, following apresentation at the SAA Conference Research Forum, Texas 2009; an archivist is usingoutputs for strategy development.

Many papers and presentations were given at conferences, seminars, meetings, and similarevents, often by invitation. These constituted a significant mode of disseminating Projectfindings and of seeking collaboration and support from further audiences. Among the formaloutputs of the project will be further journal articles. The details of these, together with otherrelated work/activities based on the subject of the research project, are given in Appendix 2.

All of the outputs have been made freely accessible on the web under a Creative CommonsLicence.

3.6. Project Evaluation

Members of the Expert Panel and FARMER (Forum for Archives and Records ManagementEducation and Research) were invited to evaluate the project mid-way through. The ExpertPanel’s feedback was particularly helpful in confirming what had worked well, what could berefined, what further work would be useful, and in raising the issue of the ‘missing vision’ forERM. Comments included: "The AC+erm research project has been valuable in that ... itdidn't focus unduly on one dimension of the infrastructure (e.g. technology) over the other.Three important and distinct infrastructure-related themes - technology, process, and people- were addressed equally" and "one of the greatest benefits of AC+erm was the opportunityto assess the use and value of a wide variety of research methods. Few other e-recordsinitiatives have explored the use of multiple research methods to such an extent and evenfewer have taken the steps required to assess their adequacy. In many respects, theexperience gained from employing these research methods will be as valuable as theAC+erm research results themselves.”

A formal project evaluation was conducted during the final colloquium. It revealed, forexample, that 55% of delegates had already used outputs from the project, 88% said theywill use them in future and a delegate wrote "[I] find the whole project - and its formats, reallygroundbreaking." 91% of the delegates who had used/accessed materials from the projectstrongly agreed/agreed they had contributed to their knowledge of ERM; 78% and 60%strongly agreed/agreed they were, respectively, influencing their own practice/serviceprovision or that of their organisation. (Over 90% of delegates were from outside ofacademia).




17

4. Conclusions

The AC+erm project successfully investigated and critically explored issues and practicalstrategies to support accelerating the pace of positive change in managing electronicrecords, using an approach that was as innovative as the subject matter under investigation.It challenged existing recordkeeping paradigms to position the future development of anappropriate practical paradigm for ERM; it developed and shared examples of ERMstrategies, tactics and practice; and developed a contemporary critical view of severalaspects of ERM at both the research and practical levels. The research was robustlydesigned, ambitious (in terms of the number and type of participants), challenging (in termsof its scale and timing) and not without risk. It required adaptation and pragmatic decisions todeliver on time.

The project data is the largest global set of real evidence of its kind, not only in terms of theprimary data gathered from the e-Delphi studies and colloquia but also the collation of datafrom the systematic literature review. The research has contributed to knowledge andunderstanding in three main ways:

1. the data provide an evidence-base that supports, and in some cases refutes, what hasbeen suspected for some time but has remained largely anecdotal

2. the findings provide some new insight into the issues, particularly in terms of theinterrelationships between the three perspectives of designing an organisational-centredarchitecture for managing electronic records that were studied (people, process andtechnology); the emphasis on contextualisation, complexity and contingency; and thepredominance of people issues

3. the research methods used and their novel combination and application in the recordsmanagement discipline.

The key headline findings that emerged about electronic records management are:

few organisations and/or individuals have articulated a vision for ERM the people, process and systems/technology aspects of ERM are inextricably linked;

though useful for the research design and as an analytical tool, the distinctionbetween them is not one that can legitimately be drawn in modelling what actuallyhappens

people issues are predominant, fundamental and challenging as they concern culture,philosophical attitudes, awareness of RM and ERM issues, preferences, knowledge &skills

records professionals may be part of the problem as well as part of the solution, e.g.they take the holistic view and have the principles and tools to manage records buttheir demands may be unrealistic or too constraining

solutions for ERM are contextualised and complex the success and/or failure of ERM implementations can be contingent on the

presence/absence of small or accidental factors, e.g. an individual; an event,coincidence or opportunity)

there are few published in-depth critical case studies of success or failure, or post-implementation evaluation

risk based approaches are needed if the challenges are to be addressed in a timelyfashion and with the resources available in many contexts/organisations

records management principles appear to be applicable for ERM, however practiceneeds to be adapted.

The project outputs include solutions that have worked, or not worked, related to the keyissues facing the people, process and technology aspects of ERM. These solutions derive




18

from the experiences and expertise and perspectives of the Delphi participants representinga wide range of stakeholders and organisations. These outputs will enable a person ororganisation to select solutions to try when facing their own ERM problems or challenges.They have been produced in a wide range of formats – text, pictures, video - to engageinterest and to be more usable.

Another set of project outputs comprise the vignettes. This was an innovative approach topresenting findings and their style and format means they are usable by practitioners and/oracademics and potentially different stakeholder groups. resenting them both as ready-to-usetools and models to develop contextualised tools, increases their value and longevity.

The research methodology was innovative in a number of ways and, as a result, providesvaluable knowledge and learning for future research in the records and wider informationscience disciplines.

The first innovation was the novel use of a SLR in records management. The methodologydetails and experiential learning from conducting the SLR will be shared for other informationscience disciplines via future articles. The key conclusion to draw here is that, whilst it ispossible and appropriate to use SLR methodology in an information science discipline, wherethat discipline has a wide variety of literature and limited literature that is peer reviewedand/or research based, then the task of reviewing it systematically is significantly greater.

The second innovation was to engage participants from all stakeholder groups in ERM andacademics from multiple disciplines. This was challenging and in some respects its successwas limited (e.g. in engaging senior managers and IT professionals). However, it was vitaland rewarding. The use of an expert panel comprising (12) members from multipledisciplines and stakeholder groups was also an extremely beneficial approach to peer reviewboth for the team and the research per se. The overseas experts John McDonald and AdrianCunningham were invaluable, bringing a non-UK perspective and raising the profile of theresearch internationally.

A third innovation was the combination of e-Delphi studies and related colloquia to extendand evaluate the findings that engaged participants nationally and globally. This approachproved to be very successful in terms of engaging a wide variety of stakeholders, from a widegeographic base, and gaining feedback that not only validated findings and improved theoutputs but, crucially, enabled the subsequent phases of the project to be refined. Gainingand maintaining participants’ engagement in the e-Delphis was challenging and necessitatedusing very tight timelines, which put pressure on the research team to complete the dataanalysis and on the participants to respond.

The fourth innovation was the use of the combination of thematic and phenomenologicalanalysis methods to analyse the data, enabling the participants’ data to be themed, in greatdetail, and extending the analysis to capture the researchers’ interpretations of selectedemergent issues.

The emphasis and effort afforded to the major dissemination strategy running through theentire project was well rewarded. Publishing findings and vignettes via a website and blogwas extremely successful (see statistics Appendix 1). It is a strategy we would adopt in futureand one that can be highly recommended to other researchers undertaking a long project ina fast moving subject, such as ERM. Its success, value and impact far outweigh the delayedsubmission of planned peer-reviewed articles.

This research project was timely and, based on the statistics collected and comments andemails received, it has been valuable and has had impact. It has provided an in-depth




19

theoretical and practical assessment of ERM. It provides a range of different outputs for usein dealing with real world ERM problems facing organisations and individuals.

Further dissemination activities from this project, in the form of published articles, willcontribute more synthesis of the results and learning.




20

5. References

Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (2001) Undertaking systematic reviews of research oneffectiveness: CRD's guidance for those carrying out or commissioning reviews. 2nd edition.York: University of York, CRD. http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/report4.htm [Note: New editionis now available]

Dalkey, N.& Helmer, O. (1963) ‘An experimental application of the Delphi method to the useof experts’, Management Science, (3), pp.458–467.

Erlandsson, A. (1996). ERM: A literature review. ICA Studies 10. Paris: International Councilon Archives. http://www.ica.org/biblio.php?pdocid=5

Northumbria University (2010) Transforming Information & Records Management throughResearch & Development? A Witness Seminar Conference. Northumbria University,Newcastle upon Tyne 4 March. Newcastle upon Tyne: Northumbria University.




21

APPENDIX 1: List of outputs and statistics demonstrating use, value andimpact

Project website (www.northumbria.ac.uk/acerm)used for publicity, ongoing publication of findings, methods, and vignettes, it will act as apermanent resource from the research. It contains 17 consolidated documents (from the 87published during the life of the project) providing the final project outputs and describing howthe project was conducted; it will be updated as further outputs are produced in the future.The site received 11,340 visits (which tripled annually from year 1 indicating continuedinterest), 4,078 visits to team members' individual web pages and over 2500 queries to thecustom Google search engine created for the ERM resource list compiled from the project.

Project blog (http://acerm.blogspot.com/) for publicity, to share and collect data.Contains 94 blog posts that received 31 comments and 3 followers; there were 6000+ uniquevisitors, 1600+ returning visitors from 30+ countries.

Twitter presence (https://twitter.com/Northumbria_RM)Made 67 tweets, attracting 56 followers and 11 lists.

Vignettes i.e. tools or exemplars for academics/practitioners to use.http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/academic/ceis/re/isrc/themes/rmarea/erm/diss/diss_vig/11 in total covering all three facets of ERM (people, processes, technology) in differentformats which are not only ready-made tools for use but also suggest models or templatesfor building tools whose content can be tailored to suit a given context. The full list is:

1. snakes and ladders: opportunities and pitfalls in records management2. phenomenological analysis: actors and contexts3. phenomenological analysis: the bottom line for records management4. phenomenological analysis: principles and methods of records management5. phenomenological analysis: essential skills for records management6. mind map: ERM solutions7. rich picture: managing risk8. narrative / story: privacy, security and access9. word cloud: solutions to ‘people’ issues in managing e-records10. fridge phrases:11. video

All outputs are freely available under a Creative Commons licence

Methodology - Project Approachhttp://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/academic/ceis/re/isrc/themes/rmarea/erm/project/

Outputs and Findingshttp://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/academic/ceis/re/isrc/themes/rmarea/erm/diss/

i. SLRhttp://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/academic/ceis/re/isrc/themes/rmarea/erm/diss/diss_slr/ People Aspects http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/ceispdf/slr_people.pdf Process Aspects http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/ceispdf/slr_process.pdf Technology Aspects http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/ceispdf/slr_tech.pdf Case Studies http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/ceispdf/slr_case.pdf




22

ii. e-Delphi Studieshttp://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/academic/ceis/re/isrc/themes/rmarea/erm/diss/delphi_diss/

Peoplehttp://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/academic/ceis/re/isrc/themes/rmarea/erm/diss/delphi_diss/people_dis/Thematic Analysis http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/ceispdf/del_pe_ta.pdfincludes:lists of questions for all rounds; preliminary thematic analysis of issues (Round 1);ranking of issues in terms of urgency/importance (Round 3 – graphs and tables):solutions to issues: approaches that work and approaches to avoid (Round 4 – PDFfiles of mind-maps, including text-only version; word clouds); responses to onlinesurvey (text and tables)Phenomenological Analysishttp://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/ceispdf/del_pe_pa.pdf of 7 selected topics(Round 5 in combination with data from previous rounds):• actors and contexts• the records management ‘bottom line’• change management• cultural change• essential skills for records management• management class change• professional ‘Turf Wars’

Processhttp://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/academic/ceis/re/isrc/themes/rmarea/erm/diss/delphi_diss/process_diss/Thematic Analysis (http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/ceispdf/del_pr_ta.pdf)http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/ceispdf/del_pe_ta.pdf includes:lists of questions for all rounds; thematic analysis of issues (Round 1); ranking ofissues in terms of urgency/importance (Round 2 – graphs and tables); solutions toissues: approaches that work and approaches to avoid split between those thatfocused on process aspects and those that addressed primarily human aspects(Round 5 - evaluation of solutions (text – collated responses to the survey)Phenomenological Analysis(http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/ceispdf/del_pr_pa.pdf) of two topicsselected for examination: Records Management principles and methods; and What isreally ‘new’?

Systems and Technologyhttp://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/academic/ceis/re/isrc/themes/rmarea/erm/diss/delphi_diss/systech_diss/Thematic Analysis (http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/ceispdf/del_te_ta.pdf)includes:lists of questions for all rounds; summary of participant responses (Round 1); rankingof issues in terms of urgency/importance (Round 2 – graphs and tables); summary ofsolutions to issues (Round 3); evaluation of solutions (Round 4 - text – collatedresponses to the survey)

iii. Colloquiahttp://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/academic/ceis/re/isrc/themes/rmarea/erm/diss/coll_diss/Colloquia 1-3 http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/ceispdf/coll_1_3.pdfColloquium 4 http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/ceispdf/coll_4.pdf




23

iv. ERM Resourceshttp://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/academic/ceis/re/isrc/themes/rmarea/erm/diss/resources/Resource list http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/ceispdf/resourcelist_2009_11.pdfCustom Google Search Engine for ERMhttp://www.google.com/cse/home?cx=013466523144167055048:kyttraq2tw4&hl=enSqworl groups http://sqworl.com/u.php?user=2047




24

APPENDIX 2: Articles, conference papers, presentations (in reversechronological order)

Articles

McLeod, J. (2009) 'Accelerating positive change in e-records management: the AC+ermproject at Northumbria University', ARC Magazine (Society of Archivists), (233), pp.24.

Hardiman, R., Childs, S. & McLeod, J. (2009) ‘Transformation through research? TheAC+erm Project and ERM’, Records Management Bulletin, (151), pp.3–7.

Childs, S. McLeod, J & Hardiman, R. (2009) Accelerating positive change in ERM – anempirical toolkit of solutions. Annual UKAIS Conference. Oxford, 31 March–1 April. UKAcademy for Information Systems Conference Proceedings. AIS (Association ofInformation Systems) Electronic Library. http://aisel.aisnet.org/ukais2009/18/

External Presentations

Hardiman, R. (2009) The AC+erm project. Society of Archivists Conference. Bristol, 2September.

McLeod, J. (2009) AC+erm: Accelerating positive change in ERM. Society of AmericanArchivists Third Annual Research Forum. USA, Austin, Texas, 11 August.

Hardiman, R. (2009) Transformation through research? The AC+erm Project. RecordsManagement Society Annual Conference. Brighton, 19–21 April.

Childs, S. McLeod, J & Hardiman, R. (2009) Accelerating positive change in ERM – anempirical toolkit of solutions. Annual UKAIS Conference. Oxford, 31 March–1 April.

Childs, S. (2009) The AC+erm Project: A Brief Tour. EDRM in Practice ’09. Birmingham,24 January.

Hardiman, R. (2008) The AC+erm Project: A Brief Tour. Records Management SocietyLondon Group meeting. London, 19 November

McLeod, J. (2008) Toolkits for Advancing Practice. RMAA Post Convention Seminar.Australia, Perth, 24 September 2008.

McLeod, J. (2008) Toolkits for Advancing Practice. RMAA Post Convention Seminar.Australia, Melbourne, 16 September.

McLeod, J. (2008) ERM in a Web 2.0 world: accelerating positive change. IIM Seminar.Australia, Sydney, 11 September.

McLeod, J. (2008) Bridging the gap: adopting and adapting principles to advancepractice. RMAA Conference. Australia, Sydney, 8–11 September.

McLeod, J. (2008) Accelerating positive change in e-records management. Society ofArchivists Conference. York, 28 August.

McLeod, J. (2008) Records management principles & practice in the post-modern world.Records Management Society Conference. Edinburgh, 21–22 April. [AC+erm projectreferred to as example of UK research]

McLeod, J. (2007) ERM: accelerating the pace of change. Records Management Society,Scotland Group meeting. Edinburgh, 11 January. [See also RMS website for meetingreport by E Pringault-Adam http://www.rms-gb.org.uk/sigs/scotland/meetings/820]

Internal Presentations

Childs, S. (2009) e-Delphi Methodology. SCEIS Seminar, Northumbria University.Newcastle, 25 March.

McLeod, J. (2008) AC+erm project: electronic records management. SCEIS ResearchForum, Northumbria University. Newcastle, January.

Childs, S. (2007) Systematic Literature Review Methodology. SCEIS Seminar,Northumbria University. Newcastle, 21 November.




25

Presentations on related ERM topics

Icelandic Records Management Association, Reykjavik, Iceland, 9 April 2010 (PI invitedto present on the project and run seminars on ERM topics)

CILIP North East seminar, Newcastle, 29 September2009 (PI gave invited seminar onERM using project outputs)

North East Records Management Forum meeting, Newcastle, 26 June 2009 (PI gaveinvited presentation on RM and EDRMS futures)

EDRM in Practice Workshop 2009, Birmingham, 24 January 2009 (Research Fellowchaired and presented)

What next for digital RM and preservation? CILIP Executive Briefing on Digital RecordsManagement and Preservation, London, 29 October 2008 (PI's opening session onstrategic options)

Records Management Association of Australia (RMAA) regional post-conferenceseminars(Melbourne 16 September, Perth 24 September) and IIM Sydney Branchbreakfast briefing (11 September) 2008 (PI)

Records Management Society Conference, Edinburgh, 21-22 April 2008 (PI's keynote onresearch was the first time this conference had explicitly included research in itsprogramme)

Society of Archivists Conference, Belfast, 28-31 August 2007 (PI on research)

See Outputs and Findings Conferences and Publications:

http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/academic/ceis/re/isrc/themes/rmarea/erm/diss/conf_diss/

Presentations –Slides: http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/ceispdf/pres.pdf

ac+erm final reportnrl.northumbria.ac.uk/34187/1/ac+ermfinalreport.pdf · ac+erm project executive...

Documents